Butte semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1886-1890, 1887-04-20
THE Incorporation ACT.

under the provisions OF the act deDafre
from voting upon it. This of itself is
feature so unjust, so un.American and 8
undemocratic as to demand it's defeat.
In the second place the act provides 10
and establishes a centralized government
that is it takes from the people their RICH
to vote for certain officers and gives it to
creature of the peoples creation. They ar
permitted to vote for a Mayor. a Polio
Magistrate and Aldermen. The latter the
do the rest of the voting for the people
that is, they vote for and elect the Cit
Treasurer aid Collector, the City Attorney
the City Marshal and one or two othe
officers. The electors have no voice as t.
who shall fill these Offices. The law pre-
sumes that the City Council, a creature Q
the people. is better qualified to judge a
to who shall fill and discharge the duties O
the offices named than are the people
This feature of the act is 80 unkAmerican
so un-Democratic, SO un-Republican tina
the indignation OF the average American
citizen rises in opposition to it.
In the third place room is left for doub'
az to who are qualified voters under tn
act. In case where the people of a place
petition the County Commissioners for in
corporation, section 4 says:
THAT at such election all electors quail
fed by the general election law Of the Ter
| ritory, and who have resided within thu
limits of the city or town for three months
preceding the election, shall be qualified
electors"
But it will be seen that this refers only
to eases in which the inhabitants of any
part of a county shall desire to be organ
lied into a city or incorporated town, and
not tn those who petition for reincorpora.
ton under this act. In this case the peti.
ton is addressed to the Mayor, and the
City Council orders an election upon the
question of reincorporation. And right
here ome the question of the qualifca.
tions of voters. Section 70, which con-
tains this provision does not say that cleo.
tors who are qualified to vote under the
general election law may vote, but that
qualified voters as defined by this act, "
only have the right of suffrage.
And now comes the question who are
electors as defined by this act. 1.-THE 18th
section provides that when the petition is
addressed to the County Commi %sioners,
electors who are entitled to vote under the
general election laws of the Territory may
vote for officers OF the newly Incorporated
town or city. But under section 70, which
provides for the reincorporation of a city
or town reference only is made to ''free-
holders" as having the right to vote. There
is cause for a double construction of the
act as to who have a right TO vote. In one
case the qualified electors are those who
a vote under the general election laws of
the Territory. In the other freeholders
alone are referred to as qualified electors.
Again Section 5 provides that the mayor
and council shall have power to compel
the owners of any addition to the city "to
lay out streets, avenues and alleys 80 as to
have the same correspond in width and
direction, ard be combinations of the
streets, avenues and alleys in the city or
town. and all such streets and alleys shall
''he deemed public property and the fee
thereof vested in the city or town." This
section would work a great hardship upon
mine owners who under it's provisions.
would be compelled to lay out a street or
an alley across their main shafts or over
that portion of their claim which may be
required for a dump SO as to correspond
with the streets and alleys of the streets.
ETC., OF the city. And this is supposed to
be done by coniscating m'ne owners prop
erty for no provision is here made to in
demnify them for their loss. Another Sec
ton, however, provides for indemnifying
owners of propert: taken for the use OF the
city, but it does not refer to cases OF this
character.
And still again no person can be eligible
to the Office of Mayor or Alderman unless
he be a freeholder. No matter what taxes
ne may pay in the city, he must own a lit
tie soil to hold those offices. He may have
hundreds OF thousands OF dollars invested
ia taxable property within the city limits,
but if his residence be on the outside he
cannot hold either, and it is questionable
under a strict construction of the law
whether he can vote for these officers.
~ AIdnoo ACdlCy, uOO Uu0 udQ, q
vote. This is offensive in the extreme.
Taken upon it's own ground, it is unjust.
instance, A may own a lot worth 500
and B may W a house and lot worth
$40. OOO. Each can cast but one vote. If
realty and not the man be entitled to suf-
frage, then B should have 100 votes, while
should have but one. This is the logical
conclusion OF a property qualification.
There are many other Objectionable
OF the bill which will b. noticed
hereafter. To sum up, the act should be
defeated for the following reasons: First,
It proposes to take the elective franchise
rom the hands OF the people and give it
to an object of their own c~reation-the
City Council.
Second, it c~entralizes governmental
power.
Third. it disfranchises some of the heay-
est taxpayers in the city.
Fourth, it gives the Council the right to
or condemn private property
naturalization to owners,
Fifth, it provides that the city may incur
IN Indebtedness OF 4 per cent, of it's asses
'lble property, or taking the assessment
within the proposed city limits at S., OOO,-
300, it would fasten a debt of 5000. 600
Upon the city.
Sixth. The present needs of the city do
lot demand the RELOCATING of the powers
above enumerated to the hands Of a few
men.
Seventh. The act contains a score Of
'niggers in the wood pile" and may breed
! nest OF doodle" Aldermen, for which
Butte has no present o. prospective need.
Eighth. 1t is IN expensive experiment
which the city cannot afford, and one
which it can do without.
Ninth. The city is not suffering under it's
resent charter, and can manage to get !
llopg under it for sometime to come with
tut Inconvenience or loss.
The Socialists of Chicago, as might be
expected, claim the credit of tie vote cast